CarlHamilton

Why did you say you were single when you were married?  I know you said you didn't have the marriage certificate yet, but you could have just told the officer that.  To a neutral observer, it looks like you had something to hide and it's not clear why. 

Why did you say you were single when you were married?  I know you said you didn't have the marriage certificate yet, but you could have just told the officer that.  To a neutral observer, it looks like you had something to hide and it's not clear why. 

This may be relevant to your interests: https://www.murthy.com/2018/10/10/incomplete-indian-marriage-ceremony-can-result-permanent-bar-enter-u-s/

I don't understand why you:
1) got married while in process of your n-400
2) got married when you already knew your interview date
3) got married in a foreign country then left the next day
4) got married then lied at your interview by not disclosing it.
Could you have potential problems? You bet. Will you have potential problems? Who knows. Your n-400 is based on you being here 5 years, not marriage. With that said, you lied at your interview about your marital status. That isn't looked upon very well SHOULD they find out.
I'm curious what others on here are going to say.

Their screw up is not your problem.  If they want it back, they can send you a prepaid envelope.  I think.  I haven't been in that position.  But I agree with the person above who said you're now free to forget about USCIS. 

Why would you? You are done. Forget USCIS exists.

Why is this so confusing?  There was a glitch the officer warned you about.  Ignore it.

I know it's too late now, but USCIS is encouraging online applications, not least in order to avoid what happened here.  Were you aware that you could apply online?

I know it's too late now, but USCIS is encouraging online applications, not least in order to avoid what happened here.  Were you aware that you could apply online?

I know it's too late now, but USCIS is encouraging online applications, not least in order to avoid what happened here.  Were you aware that you could apply online?

Hi Elizabeth Warren!

Hi Elizabeth Warren!

Hi Elizabeth Warren!

Hi Elizabeth Warren!

In fact, these questions are specifically designed to capture the extraordinary things that some people may have been up to a long time ago in foreign countries (Nazi crimes come to mind, not that this applies to the OP).  "Sorry, it was a long time ago" or "it didn't happen in the US therefore it doesn't count" is not something you want to say to an immigration officer when you get caught lying about wartime experiences.  

Thank you everyone for being so helpful! My dad answered yes and passed the N-400 interview! Honesty is the best policy. 

The proposed rule is properly called a "proposed rule" until it becomes final (after public comments and any revisions).  I am very aware of it and, for the benefit of other users, the version published in the Federal Register is available here: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-10-10/pdf/2018-21106.pdf
As you can see on the first page, this is a "Notice of proposed rulemaking" (also known as NOPR).
Whether the proposed rule "also has nothing to do with removal of conditions" is precisely the question folks have been asking.  I've read it and haven't found any specific language addressing this.  

Why do you need "a certificate in hand" when she has a passport?  Are you aware the certificate costs over $1000?

Why do you need "a certificate in hand" when she has a passport?  Are you aware the certificate costs over $1000?

Read the instructions and stop typing in ALLCAPS.

Get her back pronto. 

Get her back pronto. 

Get her back pronto. 

You may not want to hear it but your spouse should have been aware that the interview would be pending soon and hopefully bought a refundable plane ticket. This is th most important “interview” of her life and she should be there. No you can not call on behalf of her.

Get her back pronto.